Latest analysis from USA Today finds that the federal government has been creating a lot high paying jobs for itself.

Yet, the excuse is that they're hiring more skilled people than in the past:

USA Today: "There's no way to justify this to the American people. It's ridiculous," says Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a first-term lawmaker who is on the House's federal workforce subcommittee.

Jessica Klement, government affairs director for the Federal Managers Association, says the federal workforce is highly paid because the government employs skilled people such as scientists, physicians and lawyers. She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs.

Jessica Klement, government affairs director for the Federal Managers Association, says the federal workforce is highly paid because the government employs skilled people such as scientists, physicians and lawyers. She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs.

1. Federal Managers Association = Union.

The Federal Managers Association is the oldest, largest, most influential professional association representing the interests of the nearly 200,000 managers, supervisors, and executives serving in today's Federal government. Since 1913, FMA has been a passionate advocate for excellence in Federal public service through effective management, as well as a forceful champion of its members' legislative agenda.

2. Federal employees make 26% less ...

Either they are stupid, or Ms. Klement is lying. Count the lifetime payout, not just annual salary; and note too the absence of risk of layoff. Once in, "permanent," there are no federal downturns. There is NOPLACE in private employment with that perk.

“...She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs...”

Knee-jerk reaction is to doubt this for a few reasons, one being: Are they comparing total compensation or just salary? There’s a drammatic difference between a public sector at-will employed person paid X per year w/benefits vs. public sector (pension, Cadillac benefits, possible union, cola, etc.) job also also paid X per year.

11
posted on 12/11/2009 9:49:18 AM PST
by Made In The USA
(The only thing better than bacon, is bacon wrapped in bacon.)

In 2008, the median family income in the US was $50,233. The simple implication is that a federal bureaucrat that is paid $100,466 costs us the entire income of two average families, plus whatever the cost of the fringe benefits are, not counting all the economic damage he oversees.

We have been feeding Leviathan far too much for far too long. He has grown into a self-serving Leviathan whose purpose in living is to become a more perfect parasite on our personal wealth. The only way to deal with such a beast is to put it on a starvation diet.

They pay social security and pay into a 401k. Your back in the 1970’s. Never heard of “PERS” They pay for their health insurance, the private sector’s health insurance is usually cheaper. Most of the Federal workforce has at least a college degree. Also, most of the Federal workforce are located in metropolitan, high cost localities. If they don’t do their job they do get fired. It is not difficult to fire a federal employee.

Heh. That's (draining the swamp) part of what corrupted D.C. in the first place.

If D.C. had been left in its original, mosquito infested swamp, state instead of drained and turned into a Federal Utopia... maybe the parasites presenting infesting the place wouldn't have been so inclined to take up permanent residence there?

21
posted on 12/11/2009 10:03:43 AM PST
by LomanBill
(Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)

This is a straw man. The problem is the man behind the curtain. The shadow government. Look behind the smoke at the Federal contractors. They are multi millionaires on the backs of the American people. There are at least as many federal contractor employees as Federal employees, maybe more, that receive tax payer money. Many who make at least $200,000 a year. But the media ignores this. Most of DC is federal contractors.

[I think survivor is a good example of the mind-set of the govt work force. If you can stomach watching it]

Unfortunately, it's typical of the post-modern collective/corporate work environment in general. I think most of these collectivist Eunuchs would eat each others children... if they could even produce children in the first place.

Gone are the days when pride in one's craftsmanship and work-product were primary motivators....

The work-product of American governance?

"TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS"

Gone, apparently, as well...

24
posted on 12/11/2009 10:13:47 AM PST
by LomanBill
(Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)

One thing I learn in life is never make that type of judgement on people’s career choices. I remember people in college used to make fun of engineers who chose ROTC or government careers. Today they are the ones who have steady jobs and the ones in private industry, especially if they are older than 45 years old are the ones who get laid off and with the recession many are unemployed. Now they must go and ask people who they called losers for a job in the government.

Until Congress decides on the cost of living increases, there is no verifiable 2010 pay scale. The closest thing is the 2009 data found on the opm.gov website.

A note of caution. There really isn’t a pay scale since many localities are paid at different rates based upon cost of living. The GS scale only applies to the areas where there are few government employees.

Overall, the recession has been a boon for the Beltway crowd. The Washington metropolitan area received nearly 10 times as much stimulus money per capita as the national average, keeping the unemployment rate in the area at 6.2 percent, far below rates of other large cities9.3 percent in New York; over 10 percent in Chicago, Atlanta and Los Angelesand the national average of 10.2 percent. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2405637/posts

Is it
(a) step increases? (Hard to believe; these are small but generally unpreventable)
(b) quality step increases (again small but it takes action by the supervisor to get one)
(c) grade increases? (not just action by the supervisor but also the supervisor’s supervisor, personnel, et al.)
(d) promotions to Senior Executive Service?

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.